You discredit your argument by wording it so outrageously.
The UK student you're talking about ran a 6-figure business, which he admitted publicly on his site was all about directing people to pirated movie content (the "TV" in his domain name is, of course, a red herring).
But, worse, the notion that he was "extradited under vital anti-terrorism legislation" is simply a lie. The "anti-terrorism legislation" this phrase refers to is the entire UK/US reciprocal extradition treaty, which governs absolutely all extradition between the two countries. The changes in that treaty that people are referring to when they invoke "terrorism" were proposed and negotiated before 9/11, and actually remediate an unfairness in evidentiary standards towards the US --- it used to be easier to be extradited from the US than from the UK, and now the same standards are used on both sides.
Moreover, those changes have absolutely nothing to do with this case. The crime which O'Dwyer was charged under was a criminal offense in both the UK and the US, and the evidence implicating O'Dwyer is open-and-shut: O'Dwyer, after having his domain seized by ICE, brought it up again with a fuck-you to the authorities. He admitted to UK prosecutors that he had been taking in 15,000GBP per month (!) running the site.
The UK student you're talking about ran a 6-figure business, which he admitted publicly on his site was all about directing people to pirated movie content (the "TV" in his domain name is, of course, a red herring).
But, worse, the notion that he was "extradited under vital anti-terrorism legislation" is simply a lie. The "anti-terrorism legislation" this phrase refers to is the entire UK/US reciprocal extradition treaty, which governs absolutely all extradition between the two countries. The changes in that treaty that people are referring to when they invoke "terrorism" were proposed and negotiated before 9/11, and actually remediate an unfairness in evidentiary standards towards the US --- it used to be easier to be extradited from the US than from the UK, and now the same standards are used on both sides.
Moreover, those changes have absolutely nothing to do with this case. The crime which O'Dwyer was charged under was a criminal offense in both the UK and the US, and the evidence implicating O'Dwyer is open-and-shut: O'Dwyer, after having his domain seized by ICE, brought it up again with a fuck-you to the authorities. He admitted to UK prosecutors that he had been taking in 15,000GBP per month (!) running the site.